Are we making these people more dangerous to us by setting death penalty on offences?

Well, I totally agree with the 2nd answerer, If criminals knew they were going to face a death penalty and die anyways, they'll finish the job by killing victims and such. Inhibition of the criminal would not play in mind. What about manslaughter? Should a man who was not drunk or under the influence, got into a car accident that killed someone be charged with the death penalty? The problem is the death penalty will forever be a controversial and debatable topic. I've done many essays on the death penalty and yet they can never fully prove one side is more moral than the other. Sure, It might bring a end to revenge for the victims family but not a beginning to forgiveness and willinginess to let go.

To answer your question, In my opinion I do believe that the world or society is really dangerous when the death penalty is implaced. Although Singapore has the lowest crime rates, it doesn't mean that laws are the only factors that influence people. In psychology, some people are in their postconventional stage, which means they act morally because they feel its the right thing to do.

preconventional- act b/cuz fear of punishment

conventional-act b/cuz fear of authority

postconventional-act b/cuz of their own morality

Also to the 6th Answerer above, If you TRULY look at history, you see some people rebelling if harsh laws are imposed on them!!! Examples are like the Reign of Terror during the French REvolution, it was replaced by a 5 Directory if I'm not mistakened.

Democracy is not made up with horrible laws. You are very extreme, what makes you different from Hitler or even Stalin if you kill all those who commit crimes? Even lesser degree crimes. People make mistakes and it is up to those brave enough to help those in need even if it means to take rehabitlate those horrible people that commit crimes.

Good question......

On one hand drugs do kill people, people who are part time criminals would think twice about dealing drugs of these kind

However harden criminals who would do this would have nothing to lose, so they would either go down in a blaze or glory when there back is up against the wall or they would be very protected about themselves and plus could use extreme violence as a way of control.

would not remember. Statute of obstacles makes this very no longer likely. EDIT: nicely, somebody above me says there isn't any statute of obstacles on homicide. i exchange into blind to this. nicely. He killed somebody. Any person that has the flexibility to kill as quickly as has the flexibility to do it lower back. in spite of the indisputable fact that, there are particular standards that jurors might desire to evaluate a pair of defendant and his crime until now they are in a position to furnish a dying penalty sentence. issues such because of the fact the age of the sufferer (if the sufferer is decrease than 12, it is to be seen), the brutality of the crime (a shot to the pinnacle and on the spot dying is a lot distinctive than bludgeoning until they bleed to dying), and previous crimes committed (a sparkling record in comparison to a convicted rapist). I easily have had the adventure of being a juror on a homicide trial wherein the state exchange into searching for the dying penalty, and that i in my view can say that the court equipment works exceedingly in those situations. What maximum folk don't understand is that it is not a technique of a few people going, "responsible, kill him." there are particular standards that jurors might desire to persist with as a fashion to easily provide a advice of dying. considering you have secure none of this information, i won't be able to make a call, because of the fact i could might desire to persist with the guidelines.

I think death penalty is abused, in USA, only first class murder convicts can be put to death.

If drug dealers, rapists, robbers....etc are all suitable for death penalty, then it's dangerous for both the victims and police officers--------the suspects may never fear anything, If a rapist rapes a woman, he commits deadly crime, then he may kill the victim---"whatever, I'm dead man anyway", and the suspect could even kill more people because he's facing death penalty no matter what he did.

Home > Travel > Asia Pacific > China

how about find a more suitable category

Yes the laws are incredibly strict there, but they also have one of the lowest crime rates, do they not? You can debate whether or not you think the law is just, but I don't think it would make a criminal more dangerous.

I like the death sentence. People that do things that they know hurt others? They should pay a price.

We should expand the death sentence to include many crimes. Corrupt officials, bribery, white collar crimes, men hitting women, robbery, rape, and stupid questions on YA!

Drug dealers should always die, that would end this crime.

Hmmmm, if laws had a punishment, then people wouldn't be compelled to commit the crime?

Look at history.................if you acted stupid they killed you. Now, we treat you like you a baby that is stupid, and you get out of jail and do it again. In the old days we had less crime. Now we have so much, because they go to jail and get out and do it again.

I guess the logical answer is DONT sell drugs - duh. And given the fact that the crime rate is much much lower in Asia then in the Western world I would say they are doing something right and if that means executing scum then I am all for it

It doesn't seem to matter until they are caught.